From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755303Ab1HJW4l (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:56:41 -0400 Received: from mail-iy0-f170.google.com ([209.85.210.170]:60735 "EHLO mail-iy0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755221Ab1HJW4k convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:56:40 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4b8d6929-6163-4e25-933c-c875a1857f3a@email.android.com> References: <8449fb3abf89851fd6b2260972666a6f82542284.1312988155.git.luto@mit.edu> <4E42BDFF.5060507@zytor.com> <4b8d6929-6163-4e25-933c-c875a1857f3a@email.android.com> From: Andrew Lutomirski Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:56:19 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: NOWpOJItDgmXEWtuV71nZGQ33Ps Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86-64: Rework vsyscall emulation and add vsyscall= parameter To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: x86@kernel.org, Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, lueckintel@yahoo.com, kimwooyoung@gmail.com, Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 6:20 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > >>On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 5:14 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>> >>> Please rebase your patch on the current -linus since it appears to >>have changed since x86/vdso was merged. >>> >> >>Can you double-check?  I think it's the other way around: x86/vdso has >>fixes that should be pushed to Linus. >> >>$ git log tip/x86/vdso ^origin/master --oneline >>c149a66 x86-64: Add vsyscall:emulate_vsyscall trace event >>318f5a2 x86-64: Add user_64bit_mode paravirt op >>5d5791a x86-64, xen: Enable the vvar mapping >>f670bb7 x86-64: Work around gold bug 13023 >>9c40818 x86-64: Move the "user" vsyscall segment out of the data >>segment. >>1bdfac1 x86-64: Pad vDSO to a page boundary >>17b0436 Merge commit 'v3.0' into x86/vdso >> >>--Andy > > You're right, although coupling it makes the testing harder. If it helps, I can probably generate a new series that merges 9c40818 with the latest patch and makes the result independent of the rest (except for the trace event). I'm not sure it's worth it, though. --Andy